|
How about one where you ask what languages you will NOT be using?
Oh, and you forgot Assembly, too!
|
|
|
|
|
A lot more people choose VB6 than VB.NET, why? Does it make sense? What are the reasons for VBers to dislike .NET?
|
|
|
|
|
In my case at least its not a point of disliking .NET, it just a case of practicality. There are many VB6 progs that I have to maintain and enhance. There is no real need to rewrite any of these in anything else, so VB6 will be staying on my desktop for a while 
|
|
|
|
|
[Apart from the fact we will have to maintain old code.]
As MS says: "VB.NET is C# with VB syntax", so why bother with it. There are so many changes betwen VB and VB.NET a well know face wrote:
http://www.mvps.org/vb/index.html?rants/dotnot.htm
(watch out for the music - turn your sound off first)
Al.
ATL Student 
|
|
|
|
|
It's just sad that VB is saddled with so many legacy problems that the move to a cleaner VB.NET is such a hassle for those wanting to bring their old VB6 code along.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think many will be porting their VB6 code, especially since VB6 and VS.Net seem to be fairly happy on the same machine.
It's not just the language that has changed (read: grown up!) it's the paradigm shift that goes with it (eg. ADO.NET vs ADO 2.6) which will cause confusion. The jump between VB and its dotnet counterpart is far larger than for VC.
I'd be willing to be flamed but I think that the major problem is that lots of VB developers **don't want/need** a grown-up VB. To quote Bruce McKinney in "Hardcore VB" {it's on http://www.mvps.org/vb/hardcore/ if you want it) [possibly out of context!!]
".. So with the negative stuff out of the way, let me get back to the reason I chose Visual Basic in the first place. It’s still the fastest way to get an interesting idea up and running. No other language gives the same instant gratification."
For me his killer line is:
"Visual Basic shouldn’t be like C++ or SmallTalk or Delphi or any other language, but it should allow us to do what needs to be done."
Compare and contrast that with VB.Net.
Kind regards
Al.
VC6 & VC.Net Student
|
|
|
|
|
Well for one thing - and it seems this point is missed by many people - if there are no installations of the CLR then your CLR compilation WILL NOT RUN. Can you imagine the CLR runtime? It will make the VB6 distribution look teeny tiny.
You asked why people dislike .NET and it's simply because it's being shoved down our throats. Of course anything version 1 is also a problem. I am fully patched up and yet my server has been hacked twice this last week.
Get the basics right and THEN ship something new and improved.
|
|
|
|
|
It is sad indeed. But I have a feeling that in the long run we will all eventually start to migrate. It has happened so often in the past. Lets hope it will continue to happen in the future as well.
Find out what you like doing best and get someone to pay you for doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with VB.NET is that it promises to break much existing VB6 code. It is not a simple upgrade of VB to add more features and make general improvements, but rather a radical departure from previous versions of VB. While VB.NET is a vast improvement over VB6 in terms of capabilities and features, it does so at the expense of existing code. Personally, I have no problem learning new technology and adapting to change, but the change being made does not correlate with the existing design goals of VB.
VB6 is a tool that is meant to accomplish certain common business programming projects quickly and easily, not a language designed to accomplish every programming task possible at the expense of ease of use. VB.NET attempts to make VB an easy-to-use RAD version of C++. While this is an admirable goal, C++ does a very good job of being the programming language that can do anything. It has been proven as such time and time again. VB's current popularity stems from the fact that it is easy to use and can be used to tackle many common tasks quickly and effectivly. By adding C++-style power to VB, MS adds C++-style complexity to VB. Rather than reinventing VB, why not simply upgrade it to do what it does now but better and let the projects that need the power and complexity of C++ be written in C++? If you can learn and understand the advanced features of VB.NET, you can learn and understand C++.
Chris Cubley
|
|
|
|
|
|
I got a problem in my MFC Application. I have loaded a bitmap in my childwindow with scrollbars. But when I scroll the picture, the picture starts flickering really bad.
Can Anyone help me out.
Vikas
|
|
|
|
|
You knew to post this in the programming forum, why on earth post it here as well ?
Christian
#include "std_disclaimer.h"
People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made.
The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
|
|
|
|
|
i might play with C#, if i have the chance, but i'm not going to be "working" with it. did anyone else make that distinction here?
-c
------------------------------
Smaller Animals Software, Inc.
http://www.smalleranimals.com
|
|
|
|
|
I'm working mostly in Java and playing with C++
|
|
|
|
|
Which do you prefer ?
Christian
#include "std_disclaimer.h"
People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made.
The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with Franky.
I've been working in Java for the past year+ and have been a VC++ developer since V1.0. I relish interfaces and Java's discovery mechanisms, introspection, and of course automatic gc'ing via reference counting. But imho, there's no easier tool to chrun out Windows (desktop) apps than MFC/VC++. Working in Java has got me started using Java-esque design patterns in my MFC apps.
/ravi
"There is always one more bug..."
http://www.ravib.com
ravib@ravib.com
|
|
|
|
|
I like C++ more then Java. It really depends on what kind of project I'm working on. I don't like programming a GUI in Java. I do like to program server-programs in Java (servlets, ...).
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps there should be a checkbox for "plain" C++ (not a Visual, but still C++) since we have a "C" checkbox...
|
|
|
|
|
I ran out of option boxes 
Which flavour of C++?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
X3J16. The 1996 standard that ( in theory ) all our compilers are supposed to fully support. ( I admit to not having yet read my copy, I tend to stick to Stroustrup 3rd. ed.  ).
I concur - I looked for it on the basis that while I'm guessing I'll be in the Windows world for some time to come, I work hard at learning things like STL on the basis that they are *standard*, and are skills I can keep and use if I find myself drifting away from the WinTel world, for whatever reason.
Christian
#include "std_disclaimer.h"
People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made.
The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, Visual C++ should not be considered a language. It's a development environment for developing Windows apps/components in C++ or C.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
